People v. Cook

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People v. Cook

251 A.D.2d 1033, 675 N.Y.S.2d 268, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7079

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 10, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 251 A.D.2d 1033 (People v. Cook) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

People v. Cook, 251 A.D.2d 1033, 675 N.Y.S.2d 268, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7079 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). We reject the contention of defendant that, during the People’s case-in-chief, County Court erred in admitting evidence concerning prior bad acts of defendant toward the victim, his paramour. The evidence of defendant’s prior abusive conduct toward the victim was admissible on the issue [1034]*1034of forcible compulsion (see, People v George, 197 AD2d 588, 589, lv denied 82 NY2d 925; People v Velasquez, 141 AD2d 882, 883, lv denied 72 NY2d 926) and as background material to aid the jury in understanding the relationship between defendant and the victim (see, People v Shorey, 172 AD2d 634, 635, lv denied 78 NY2d 974). Additionally, the court properly exercised its discretion in weighing the probative value of the evidence against its potential prejudicial effect (see, People v Alvino, 71 NY2d 233, 242-247; People v George, supra).

We likewise reject the contention of defendant that the court erred in denying his CPL 330.30 motion without a hearing. The basis for the motion was alleged conduct that did not appear in the record. (Appeal from Judgment of Niagara County Court, Fricano, J. — Sexual Abuse, 1st Degree.) Present — Pine, J. P., Lawton, Wisner, Callahan and Fallon, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

—Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: The verdict is not against the weight of the evidence (see, People v Bleakley, 69 NY2d 490, 495). We reject the contention of defendant that, during the People’s case-in-chief, County Court erred in admitting evidence concerning prior bad acts of defendant toward the victim, his paramour. The evidence of defendant’s prior abusive conduct toward the victim was admissible on the issue [1034]*1034of forcible compulsion (see, People v George, 197 AD2d 588, 589, lv denied 82 NY2d 925; People v Velasquez, 141 AD2d 882, 883, lv denied 72 NY2d 926) and as background material to aid the jury in understanding the relationship between defendant and the victim (see, People v Shorey, 172 AD2d 634, 635, lv denied 78 NY2d 974). Additionally, the court properly exercised its discretion in weighing the probative value of the evidence against its potential prejudicial effect (see, People v Alvino, 71 NY2d 233, 242-247; People v George, supra).

We likewise reject the contention of defendant that the court erred in denying his CPL 330.30 motion without a hearing. The basis for the motion was alleged conduct that did not appear in the record. (Appeal from Judgment of Niagara County Court, Fricano, J. — Sexual Abuse, 1st Degree.) Present — Pine, J. P., Lawton, Wisner, Callahan and Fallon, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

251 A.D.2d 1033, 675 N.Y.S.2d 268, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7079, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/people-v-cook-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack